About your Search

20121226
20130103
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
norquist. now, i've known grover norquist for a long time. i think he's a fine person. he holds no elective office and, in fact, he wasn't elected president. so the president of the united states who is responsible for figuring out our problems who has not offered a single serious, cost-cutting measure, i mean, tell me what you think barack obama's going to go to the house and senate democrats and say i need a yes vote on this cost cutting. instead of dealing with the fact that the president of the united states is once again totally failing to provide leadership, the president has cleverly gotten us worried about whether grover norquist now defines the republican party. because as we all know, if we are not worthy of the news media's respect and love -- [laughter] we are a party that will disappear. i mean, just listen to the tone of the language when you watch morning joe or you watch, you know, even fox and friends are off on this whole. shtick. and grover did something very important. he came up with the idea of a no-tax increase pledge as a way of drawing a line in the sand. i voted ag
is the grover norquist pledge that the officials, mainly republicans, have taken. it should be deemed unconstitutional. no elected official should be allowed to take any kind of pledge. when boehner presented plan b, he could not even get a vote on it because it would raise taxes for the million-dollar people. this is definitely a problem. i also think that no entitlement should be part of this when it comes to the senior citizens. their social security, they do not get paid that much. >> she was mentioning the bill that the speaker had to pull because he did not have the votes, the one that would raise income over those making over $1 million per year. a news reporter from "the washington post" talked about the cliff. the minority leader has appealed to the vice president directly in a last-ditch deal to avoid a fiscal cliff. kerry reid stepped back from the talks on the senate floor. and he had yet to hear back from the. -- from them. we will show you comments in a short while ago. taking your phone calls on the fiscal cliff with two days to go, the house and senate vote in a sessio
of all the games going on and there are you, grover norquist, a very bright guy still resolutely saying a pledge is a pledge is a pledge, it cannot be broken when many of your own party are now saying you know, what it doesn't make sense to have this irresolute position anymore. >> two things, the pledge is not for life. but everybody who signed the pledge, including peter king, who tried to weasel out of it -- shame on him as the "new york sun" says tonight. i hope his wife understands commitments last a little longer than two years or something. >> whoa, hang on, hang on. that was a bit below the belt, grover. >> hey, if you think a commitment is not for as long as you make it for, the commitment for the pledge as peter king well knows when he signed it is as long as you're in congress you will rein in spending and reform government, not raise taxes. it's not for 500 years or two generations. it's only as long as you're in the house or the senate. if he stayed too long, that's his problem. but you don't tell the bank, oh, the mortgage, wasn't that long time ago? if you make a commitme
. both times, boehner could not deliver because they refused because of grover norquist to allow any tax revenues whatsoever. we had meetings with the vice president, biden and cantor. cantor walked out of those meetings. he is the majority leader in the house. we had the gang of six, the gang of eight. we had this super committee, and they were doing good things, good things, dealing with entitlements and revenues. and a week before they were to report, buy virtue of statute, i get a letter signed by virtually every republican, too bad about the super committee, we're not going to do anything with revenues. so this is not a capsule of a couple of days. this has been going on for years. they cannot cross over the threshold that has been built by grover norquist. people who are rich, who make a lot of money, they are not opposing raising the taxes on them. the only people in america who don't think taxes should be raised on the rich are the republicans who work in this building. so any time the speaker and the republican leader come to the president and say we have got a deal for you, the
or not they consider this to be a tax increase. grover norquist has said voting for this is not a tax increase because the taxes are technically higher right now and this would actually be a tax cut, so -- >> but didn't you think the whole thing was sort of a joke? i mean, when you parse that kind of stuff, oh, it's not really -- i mean, really? really? >> i know the republicans for decades have been burned whenever they've gone and raised taxes and they've been promised spending cuts and they never materialize. so, this is a very, very sore spot for republicans. they don't want to have to vote for a tax increase and then not get anything in return on the spending side, and we have not seen any real kind of offer from the president on spending. and i think that that's where the rubber's really going to hit the road in a couple months. >> jonathan collegeo and. >>> right now secretary of state hillary clinton is said to be in good spirits, resting comfortably in a new york hospital, undergoing treatment for a blood clot. doctors told us yesterday that that clot is located in a vein between her skull an
to the right of rick santorum. he took the grover norquist pledge. he did all the things that were required of a potential republican nominee. but in each of those steps, he made it harder for him to win a general election. and he brought to this some strengths. the other thing that will the president four years ago was that romney was the likely nominee because i believe in the theory of opposites. whoever the incumbent is, people are looking for the brevity, not the replica. and romney would represent a stark difference from obama, a businessman, grounded, not a visionary, not an order for. >> so you thought he would be the nominee. you thought that through the whole entire primary process? >> i had a few moments of doubt, as i suspect he may have. but he got to those moments was to do what i said, to move to the right. with each step, i think he made himself more vulnerable. in the abstract, his profile as a businessman will stay positive, even until the final day. it was the concept of a businessman who knows how to create jobs and so on. that was their message and that was not a bad me
on immigration. he moved to the right of rick santorum. he took the grover norquist pledge. he did all the things that were required of a potential republican nominee. but in each of those steps, he made it rder for him to win a general election. and he brought to this some strengths. the other thing that will the president four years ago was that romney was the likely nominee because i believe in the theory of opposites. whoever the incumbent is, people are looking for the brevity, not the replica. and romney would represent a stark difference from obama, a businessman, grounded, t a visionary, not an order for. >> so you thought he would be the nominee. you thought that through the whole entire primary process? >> i had a few moments of doubt, as i suspect he may have. but he got to those moments was to do what i said, to move to the right. with each step, i think he made himself more vulnerable. in the abstract, his profile as a businessman ll stay positive, even until the final day. it was the concept of a businessman who knows how to create jobs and so on. that was their message and that was
norquist had said never cut any spending? i'm going to sign a bill that says never cut and spending. grover norquist, here's a great example, he does not even believe in economic case multipliers. host: gary says -- guest: what's interesting about the last election cycles is we had under president bush and the end, democrats seized control of congress in big numbers. and we had the big democratic sweep with the white house in 2008. 2010, republicans came sweeping back. we've had a pendulum swing, very contractive time period. that's one of the factors. we have seen both sides really dug in because they don't know where the pendulum will swing in the next direction. -- eklection. host: from one of our viewers -- on facebook -- guest: that's right. one of the points she raises is it's easy to look and collectors and say we will just drop 10% of this program and 20% off that program. but when you get down to the individual programs, we're talking state and local police departments, fire departments, teachers' pay, all sorts of programs that have different constituencies that you would feel the
. the for them to have to but the but of harrison -- we can i get past grover norquist. when there is no revenue that makes it hard. john boehner could not even pass a tax proposal remade where it would keep the taxes for everybody except those making over $1 million a year. they said, no, you cannot do that. i am here and happy to listen to anything necessary. mary history of giving the president aware >> congress has until december 31 to reach a deal on the fiscal cliff, otherwise tax increases and spending cuts go into effect. negotiations between congress and the president could take friday when all four leaders of the house and senate meet with the president at the white house. a look at the countdown to the fiscal cliff, the guest will be a white house honor. home on a ship and the united states with tools author of american the nightmare how neighbor -- america undermines the negotiation nightmare. more from militia and townsman of the u. s economic research surfaced and heron radcliffe. coming up on c-span, a discussion on the history of the new york times. an examination report on the i
allegiance to this grover norquist fellow. did they not realize that you have to have taxes to pay for these two wars that the republicans -- that was george w. bush who was in charge that time -- they started these wars. and yet, they are saying we have to control the spending. the spending is on these wars. so, let congress take a pay cut of about 35%, and take any revenue the dead and take that revenue and put it towards the debt to pay down our debt. our debt is caused by wars, not by social security, not by medicare. we people who work out here, we pay into social security. we pay into medicare. so, let them take a pay cut. if they want to start cutting everybody, how about congress taking a pay cut? thank you for taking my call. host: christian, your message to washington on this deadline day, about 9 1/2 hours before we reached the midline -- the midnight deadline. caller: i do not think we should now go over the fiscal cliff, and i do not think it is responsible whether you are republican or democrat. i think both parties should unite and work for all americans. it is not o
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)